Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & R

187 Oak Grove Avenue, Brattleboro, VT 05301 (802) 257-0307
For profit - Partnership 80 Beds NATIONAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES Data: November 2025
Trust Grade
80/100
#8 of 33 in VT
Last Inspection: September 2024

Within standard 12-15 month inspection cycle. Federal law requires annual inspections.

Overview

Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & Rehabilitation has a Trust Grade of B+, which means it is above average and generally recommended for families seeking care. It ranks #8 out of 33 nursing homes in Vermont, placing it in the top half of facilities in the state, and is #2 out of 3 in Windham County, indicating only one local option is better. However, the facility's trend is worsening, with issues increasing from 1 in 2022 to 4 in 2024. While staffing is decent with a 3/5 star rating and a turnover rate of 40% (lower than the state average of 59%), there are some concerns about care. Notably, the facility failed to ensure proper food safety, resulting in unsanitary conditions in the kitchen, and a resident dependent on assistance was found on the floor due to inadequate monitoring. On a positive note, the facility has not incurred any fines, which suggests compliance with regulations. Overall, families should weigh these strengths and weaknesses carefully.

Trust Score
B+
80/100
In Vermont
#8/33
Top 24%
Safety Record
Low Risk
No red flags
Inspections
Getting Worse
1 → 4 violations
Staff Stability
○ Average
40% turnover. Near Vermont's 48% average. Typical for the industry.
Penalties
✓ Good
No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Vermont facilities.
Skilled Nurses
○ Average
Each resident gets 37 minutes of Registered Nurse (RN) attention daily — about average for Vermont. RNs are the most trained staff who monitor for health changes.
Violations
✓ Good
Only 5 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
★★★★☆
4.0
Overall Rating
★★★☆☆
3.0
Staff Levels
★★★★☆
4.0
Care Quality
★★★★☆
4.0
Inspection Score
Stable
2022: 1 issues
2024: 4 issues

The Good

  • 4-Star Quality Measures · Strong clinical quality outcomes
  • Full Sprinkler Coverage · Fire safety systems throughout facility
  • No fines on record
  • Staff turnover below average (40%)

    8 points below Vermont average of 48%

Facility shows strength in quality measures, fire safety.

The Bad

Staff Turnover: 40%

Near Vermont avg (46%)

Typical for the industry

Chain: NATIONAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES

Part of a multi-facility chain

Ask about local staffing decisions and management

The Ugly 5 deficiencies on record

Sept 2024 4 deficiencies
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

ADL Care (Tag F0677)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based upon observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide Activities of Daily Living [ADL] care and assistance to maintain good nutrition for 1 dependent resident [Res.#39] ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based upon observation, interview, and record review, the facility failed to provide Activities of Daily Living [ADL] care and assistance to maintain good nutrition for 1 dependent resident [Res.#39] of 3 sampled residents dependent on ADL assistance. Findings include: Per review of Res.#39's Care Plan, the resident is identified as having as having Dysphagia [Dysphagia is a medical term for difficulty swallowing. Difficulty swallowing can lead to: Malnutrition, weight loss and dehydration. ]*, has risk for weight loss and malnutrition due to variable meal intake and dysphagia as well as cognitive impairment, at risk for dehydration, has impaired cognitive function/dementia or impaired thought processes, has an ADL [Activities of Daily Living] self-care performance deficit related to dementia, and has impaired visual function related to left eye blindness. Care Plan interventions to counteract Res.#39's nutritional risks include EATING: Continual supervision, May need more cues/assist, Provide feeding/dining assistance as needed. Set up for meals, Ensure the resident has access to Beverage of choice, and Ensure all meals and fluid intake occur under staff supervision. A meal observation was conducted on 9/9/24 at 11:45 AM. During the lunch meal observation, Res.#39 was observed seated in a wheelchair with h/her eyes closed at a table with 4 other residents. At 11:45 AM, a meal platter and a drink were placed in front of Res.#39, along with platters in front of the other 4 residents, including a resident seated next to Res.#39. Per observation, a staff Licensed Nursing Assistant [LNA] sat down next to the resident seated next to Res.#39, and the LNA began to feed that resident. Res.#39 was positioned in front of h/her meal and drink and made no attempt to feed h/herself or was cued or assisted by staff for approximately 10 minutes, while the other residents at the table ate their meal and the resident seated next to Res.#39 was being fed by the LNA. At 11:55 AM, another resident, Res.#34, approached the table in their wheelchair, took the drink from in front of Res.#39, drank from it, then wheeled away from the table carrying the drink with them. The LNA seated at the table said nothing to Res.#34 and did nothing to intervene. Res. #39 remained seated at the table in front of h/her meal for another 11 minutes without cueing or assistance, when a second LNA came over to the table and replaced the drink that the other resident had taken. Res.#39 was not offered the drink or cued to drink. At 12:10 PM, 25 minutes after the meal platter was placed in front of Res.#39, after the LNA had finished feeding the resident seated next to Res.#39 and the other residents at the table had finished their meals, the LNA moved their chair next to Res.#39 and offered h/her a bite of the meal. Res.#39 took a spoonful of the food and shook h/her head. The LNA did not question the resident as to why they disliked it, if they wanted an alternative, or if the meal needed reheating after sitting uncovered for 25 minutes. An interview was conducted with the facility's Director of Nursing [DON] on 9/10/24 at 9:30 AM. The DON confirmed that Res.#39 was identified as at risk for weight loss, malnutrition and dehydration, and diagnosed with impaired cognition and dementia along with difficulty swallowing. The DON confirmed Res.#39 is dependent on staff for cueing and assistance with meals, and agreed that based on the observation on 9/9/24 at 11:45 AM, Res.#39 was not offered either while the other residents at the table ate and/or were being fed, another resident took Res.#39's drink with no staff intervention, and after being offered their meal after 25 minutes and declining it, was not offered to re-heat the meal or an alternative.
CONCERN (D) 📢 Someone Reported This

A family member, employee, or ombudsman was alarmed enough to file a formal complaint

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Accident Prevention (Tag F0689)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide services that included supervision, monitoring, and ADL (Activities of Daily Living) care necessary to prevent a fall from a wheelch...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interview and record review the facility failed to provide services that included supervision, monitoring, and ADL (Activities of Daily Living) care necessary to prevent a fall from a wheelchair for 1 of 10 residents in the applicable sample (Resident #19). Findings include: Per record review Resident #19 was found on the floor of her/his room at 1:45 AM on 8/7/24. Review of Resident #19's care plan reveals that s/he is totally dependent on two staff with a mechanical lift for transfers to and from a wheelchair. The care plan also indicates that s/he has an ADL self-care performance deficit, with interventions that include, ensure resident is assisted to bed by 11 PM unless resident requests otherwise, intentional rounding every 1 hour for repositioning, and monitor positioning while in room. A Health Status Note written on 8/7/2024 states that the Resident was found on the floor next to her/his wheelchair in her/his room at 1:45 AM. The note further states that the call light was out of reach and the mechanical lift was in the room. Another Health Status Note written on 8/7/24 at 3:45 PM states that it appears that the Resident slid out of her/his wheelchair and was on the floor before being found by staff. Review of the facility incident summary written by the Administrator dated 8/7/2024 reveals that Resident #19 was assisted from the dining room to her/his room and was not assisted to bed or reevaluated until s/he was found on the floor by staff at approximately 1:45 AM. The summary also states that the Resident was to be turned and repositioned every 2 hours. Per interview with the facility Administrator on 9/11/24 at 11:36 AM the facility internal investigation of the incident determined that a staff member brought the Resident to her/his room sometime after the evening meal. The Licensed Nursing Assistant (LNA) who was assigned to Resident #19's care had signed documentation that s/he had performed safety checks however, s/he had not. The evening and night shift staff had not done walking rounds at change of shift as is expected. During the onsite survey, it was determined that the facility had implemented actions to correct the noncompliance prior to the start of the re-certification survey, which included evaluation of Resident #19, staff education regarding safety checks, repositioning, intentional walking rounds, and increased monitoring of assistance provided to the residents. The facility was able to demonstrate monitoring of the corrective action and sustained compliance.
CONCERN (F)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Food Safety (Tag F0812)

Could have caused harm · This affected most or all residents

Based upon observation and interview, the facility failed to meet food service safety requirements. Findings include: 1.) Per observation on 9/8/24 at 9:30 PM and again on 9/11/24 at 9:45 AM, a fan ...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based upon observation and interview, the facility failed to meet food service safety requirements. Findings include: 1.) Per observation on 9/8/24 at 9:30 PM and again on 9/11/24 at 9:45 AM, a fan located above the clean dish drying area in the facility's kitchen was noted to have a notable covering of dark gray dust-like material on the fan blades and the outer surface of the fan guard/grill. On 9/11/24 at 9:45 AM, the fan was noted to be circulating air directly above a tray of clean flatware. The dirt on the fan guard was noted to include a strand of dark, stringlike material extended from the guard while the fan was operating. The observation on 9/11/24 was conducted with the facility's Dietary Manager, who confirmed the fan blowing on the clean flatware represented an unsanitary condition, and stated that Maintenance had been notified about the fan needing cleaning the day before, on 9/10/24, but the cleaning had not been done. 2.) Per observation on 9/9/24 at 12:31 PM, a bag of white bread slices was noted to have visible green mold on it in the facility's 2nd floor kitchenette. Per interview on 9/11/24 at 9:45 AM the Dietary Manager confirmed the bread in the 2nd floor kitchenette was moldy and stated that the facility did not have a process for monitoring and dating bread to ensure it was not used beyond its expiration date.
MINOR (C)

Minor Issue - procedural, no safety impact

Grievances (Tag F0585)

Minor procedural issue · This affected most or all residents

Based on interviews, observation, and record reviews, the facility failed to support the resident's right to file grievances anonymously for 5 out of 5 residents in the sample (Resident's #5, #26, #55...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on interviews, observation, and record reviews, the facility failed to support the resident's right to file grievances anonymously for 5 out of 5 residents in the sample (Resident's #5, #26, #55, #53 and #67). This has the potential to affect all residents in the facility. Findings Include: Per interview at Resident Council (RC) on 9/11/2024 at 10:30 AM, 5 out of 5 residents revealed they did not know how to file a grievance anonymously, or at all, and had no access to forms to be able to file anonymously or independently. All five residents revealed if they had known and understood their rights to file a grievance, they would have done so. Per observation of all units at the facility at 11:45 AM, there was no evidence of grievance forms on any unit for a resident, or his/her representative, to submit a grievance independently or anonymously. Per interview on 9/11/2024 at approximately 12:00 PM with the Administrator, s/he confirmed that there were no forms available for individuals to file a grievance independently or anonymously on any units. The Administrator confirmed during interview there was not a process or form available for the residents or responsible party to file a grievance independently or anonymously. Per facility policy titled Grievance/Concern Policy, it states the following: The residents/responsible party can bring forward their concerns verbally and or by written grievance process. Grievance/Concerns forms are available on the nursing units and in the front lobby where applicable. There is no evidence that forms were made available or that residents/representatives had access to file a grievance independently or anonymously.
Jul 2022 1 deficiency
CONCERN (D)

Potential for Harm - no one hurt, but risky conditions existed

Pressure Ulcer Prevention (Tag F0686)

Could have caused harm · This affected 1 resident

Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident with pressure ulcers receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards o...

Read full inspector narrative →
Based on observation, interview and record review the facility failed to ensure that a resident with pressure ulcers receives necessary treatment and services, consistent with professional standards of practice, to promote healing, prevent infection and prevent new ulcers from developing for 1 of 3 residents in a standard survey sample. Per record review for Resident #76, admitted in late June, 2022, the resident had unstageable pressure ulcers to the right and left buttocks on the admission assessment. Interview with unit LPN on 7/12/22 at 10:25 AM, the LPN was unaware of resident #76 having any open skin areas. On 7/12/22 at 10:30 AM, the Unit Manager and Director of Nursing (DON) confirmed the resident did currently have open areas on both right and left buttocks and that these areas were being treated. They were unable to locate any provider orders to treat the pressure ulcers or documentation that the ulcers had been receiving any treatment. On 7/12/22 at 3:45 PM, the DON reported a verbal order for treatment had been previously received; however, it had not been documented in the electronic health record nor had it been put on either the Medication Administration Record (MAR) or the Treatment Administration Record (TAR). Therefore, there was no documentation to substantiate the receipt of an order for treatment or record of treatment having been completed.
Understanding Severity Codes (click to expand)
Life-Threatening (Immediate Jeopardy)
J - Isolated K - Pattern L - Widespread
Actual Harm
G - Isolated H - Pattern I - Widespread
Potential for Harm
D - Isolated E - Pattern F - Widespread
No Harm (Minor)
A - Isolated B - Pattern C - Widespread

Questions to Ask on Your Visit

  • "Can I speak with families of current residents?"
  • "What's your RN coverage like on weekends and overnight?"

Our Honest Assessment

Strengths
  • • Grade B+ (80/100). Above average facility, better than most options in Vermont.
  • • No major safety red flags. No abuse findings, life-threatening violations, or SFF status.
  • • No fines on record. Clean compliance history, better than most Vermont facilities.
  • • Only 5 deficiencies on record. Cleaner than most facilities. Minor issues only.
Concerns
  • • No significant concerns identified. This facility shows no red flags across CMS ratings, staff turnover, or federal penalties.
Bottom line: Generally positive indicators. Standard due diligence and a personal visit recommended.

About This Facility

What is Pine Heights At Brattleboro Center For Nursing & R's CMS Rating?

CMS assigns Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & R an overall rating of 4 out of 5 stars, which is considered above average nationally. Within Vermont, this rating places the facility higher than 99% of the state's 100 nursing homes. This rating reflects solid performance across the metrics CMS uses to evaluate nursing home quality.

How is Pine Heights At Brattleboro Center For Nursing & R Staffed?

CMS rates Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & R's staffing level at 3 out of 5 stars, which is average compared to other nursing homes. Staff turnover is 40%, compared to the Vermont average of 46%. This relatively stable workforce can support continuity of care.

What Have Inspectors Found at Pine Heights At Brattleboro Center For Nursing & R?

State health inspectors documented 5 deficiencies at Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & R during 2022 to 2024. These included: 4 with potential for harm and 1 minor or isolated issues.

Who Owns and Operates Pine Heights At Brattleboro Center For Nursing & R?

Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & R is owned by a for-profit company. For-profit facilities operate as businesses with obligations to shareholders or private owners. The facility is operated by NATIONAL HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES, a chain that manages multiple nursing homes. With 80 certified beds and approximately 77 residents (about 96% occupancy), it is a smaller facility located in Brattleboro, Vermont.

How Does Pine Heights At Brattleboro Center For Nursing & R Compare to Other Vermont Nursing Homes?

Compared to the 100 nursing homes in Vermont, Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & R's overall rating (4 stars) is above the state average of 2.8, staff turnover (40%) is near the state average of 46%, and health inspection rating (4 stars) is above the national benchmark.

What Should Families Ask When Visiting Pine Heights At Brattleboro Center For Nursing & R?

Based on this facility's data, families visiting should ask: "Can I visit during a mealtime to observe dining assistance and food quality?" "How do you handle medical emergencies, and what is your hospital transfer rate?" "Can I speak with family members of current residents about their experience?"

Is Pine Heights At Brattleboro Center For Nursing & R Safe?

Based on CMS inspection data, Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & R has a clean safety record: no substantiated abuse findings (meaning no confirmed cases of resident harm), no Immediate Jeopardy citations (the most serious violation level indicating risk of serious injury or death), and is not on the Special Focus Facility watch list (a federal program monitoring the lowest-performing 1% of nursing homes). The facility has a 4-star overall rating and ranks #1 of 100 nursing homes in Vermont. While no facility is perfect, families should still ask about staff-to-resident ratios and recent inspection results during their visit.

Do Nurses at Pine Heights At Brattleboro Center For Nursing & R Stick Around?

Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & R has a staff turnover rate of 40%, which is about average for Vermont nursing homes (state average: 46%). Moderate turnover is common in nursing homes, but families should still ask about staff tenure and how the facility maintains care continuity when employees leave.

Was Pine Heights At Brattleboro Center For Nursing & R Ever Fined?

Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & R has no federal fines on record. CMS issues fines when nursing homes fail to meet care standards or don't correct problems found during inspections. The absence of fines suggests the facility has either maintained compliance or corrected any issues before penalties were assessed. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review recent inspection reports for the full picture.

Is Pine Heights At Brattleboro Center For Nursing & R on Any Federal Watch List?

Pine Heights at Brattleboro Center for Nursing & R is not on any federal watch list. The most significant is the Special Focus Facility (SFF) program, which identifies the bottom 1% of nursing homes nationally based on persistent, serious quality problems. Not being on this list means the facility has avoided the pattern of deficiencies that triggers enhanced federal oversight. This is a positive indicator, though families should still review the facility's inspection history directly.